On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 04:51:07PM +0800, Qing He wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-09-27 at 17:47 +0800, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 11:02:38AM +0800, Qing He wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2009-09-26 at 19:06 +0800, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > Is pv_ops dom0 (xen/master) currently ready for SR-IOV, or are
> > > > additional patches still needed?
> > > >
> > >
> > > VFs can be created and assigned to HVM domains, we've tested that. But
> > > assigning VFs to PV domains doesn't work since the support isn't
> > > complete (at least MSI, I'm not sure about the status of INTx device).
> > >
> >
> > Ok. Do you know if anyone is working on adding those missing bits?
> > Is it missing only from domU kernel, or also from Xen hypervisor PV code?
>
> Hypervisor has the proper code, and old 2.6.18 based domU works well.
> It's just pv_ops based domU lacking this feature. Traditionally, domU
> doesn't have sufficient privilege but relies on dom0 to do certain
> things, this kind of delegation requires some special handling and
> is still subjected to more thinking.
>
Ok. So if I use linux-2.6.18-xen.hg everything should work also for PV domU.
Does Xen 3.4.1 hypervisor have the needed bits, or is it just xen-unstable?
> >
> > Also, what kernel you used in the HVM guest for SR-IOV? Just so I can
> > try this myself some day.. :)
>
> The kernel version is not important, just need the driver of VFs, like
> igbvf.
>
OK.
> >
> > > > Can upstream/vanilla 2.6.31 be used as PV guest and run the VF driver?
> > > > Or does it need additional patches?
> > >
> > > Vanilla kernel doesn't have pirq and msi-x related code, so VF doesn't
> > > work there either.
> > >
> >
> > Ok. Do you know if this is being worked on?
>
> Yes, but that's likely to take quite a long time to eventually get
> everything in.
>
Ok.
Thanks!
-- Pasi
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Home